Let Their Bones Rot that Compute the Times...

In a detailed exposition on the ninth chapter of Daniel, the Baptist expositor John Gill (1697-1771) wrote of those Jews who feeling the weight of the prophecy there given - in that it specifically told of the time in which the Messiah would appear - refused to so much as even attempt to compute the times:

The Jews are sensible of the force of this reasoning; so that, to terrify persons from considering this prophecy, they denounce the following curse, "let them burst, or their bones rot, that compute the times"

Many Christians find it difficult to understand how it is that the Jewish people in general failed to recognize Jesus as their Messiah when prophecies such as the one in Daniel 9 point so specifically to the times of Jesus' earthly ministry and death.

The sad fact is that many Jews - operating on two assumptions; first that Jesus is NOT the Messiah, and second that the time of the Messiah's appearance cannot be known - simply refuse to examine the plain and clear scriptural evidence while hurling curses at those who would dare to try to understand and ascertain the truth.

While many Christians puzzle at such willful ignorance of what they consider to be clear and obvious truth, I have to wonder sometimes if many Christians aren't guilty of the exact same thing.

The only standards for Christian 'truth' in our day seem to be those which present no threat to 'unity' or 'tolerance'. There seems to be a tacit mental acceptance that absolute Biblical truth simply cannot be known.

The battle cry of many is 'in essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things love'. The problem is, that while this sounds great, the realm of what one considers 'essential' or 'non-essential' is itself so unclear and so undefined so as to make the whole phrase meaningless. Since even amongst themselves no one can seem to agree which doctrines are 'essential' and which are 'non-essential' the whole proposition becomes not the least bit helpful, let alone scriptural - it is simply a tautology.

While most would agree with the apostle Paul that 'All scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for DOCTRINE, for reproof, for instruction in righteousness' they seemingly also agree that doctrinally the Bible is clear on VERY LITTLE, and so for the sake of 'unity' and 'tolerance' we shouldn't make an issue out of such 'non-essentials'.

Do they not see the absurdity in boldly proclaiming the Bible as their 'sole and final authority in matters of faith and practice' while believing in their hearts that the Bible actually speaks authoritatively on very little?

For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? (1Co 14:8)

It seems to me that the only 'essential' thing among these kinds of Christians has become a mutual agreement that none should speak with too much conviction or authority on any given topic.

I for one believe with the apostle that the scriptures are FIRST profitable for DOCTRINE. If clarity in doctrine simply cannot be known then such a statement is meaningless.

I have to wonder what really lies behind this prevalence of feeling that truth in doctrine simply cannot be known. Could it be that like the Jews of old many are simply afraid that the clarity of the scriptures may lead them to an uncomfortable or life altering conclusion? Are the scriptures really so difficult? Are they so difficult on nearly EVERYTHING as we are led to believe, or do many simply refuse to see?

Whatever the reason, for the time being it seems that most continue to choose the easy road under the banner of 'unity' - while actually agreeing on very little more than the condemnation of those who would dare attempt to speak with any kind of authority...

'Let their bones rot that compute the times...'